White vs Brown pasta is interesting, the starch is the same but the sugars are quite different (although only a small part of the carb grams) and makes a big difference to the gi numbers without affecting the insulin response. I'm trying to get my head around the numbers... I though blood glucose drove insulin but it's obviously not that simple. If avoiding insulin spikes is as simple as looking at the carbs/sugars numbers on the nutritional info, that makes it fairly easy to avoid foods which are likely to be stored as fat. Or is it dependant on the type of sugar, ie., it's only fructose that won't drive insulin?

What foods spike insulin the most? Well just look at the foods pro bodybuilders NEVER go without. Dairy, whey powder, eggs, fish, beef, chicken etc. Pro bodybuilders don't have insulin yet 99% of them use insulin to help build mass. If you want to be big you MUST have high insulin levels or you will look like one of those skinny fruitarian crew living on fructose with such low levels of insulin they look like a Tour De France rider despite not even being able to ride up a long climb.

White vs Brown pasta is interesting, the starch is the same but the sugars are quite different (although only a small part of the carb grams) and makes a big difference to the gi numbers without affecting the insulin response. I'm trying to get my head around the numbers... I though blood glucose drove insulin but it's obviously not that simple. If avoiding insulin spikes is as simple as looking at the carbs/sugars numbers on the nutritional info, that makes it fairly easy to avoid foods which are likely to be stored as fat. Or is it dependant on the type of sugar, ie., it's only fructose that won't drive insulin?

Interesting. This relates back to the original video because as Lustig points out, fructose doesn't produce the same insulin response as sugar. I wonder if follow up work will be done on insulin response vs glucose response. If so, we might get a better understanding of what is going on with fat storage in the presence of circulating insulin and glucose. I noted that some foods produce a disproportionately high insulin response compared to the glucose response, so insulin response may be high but glucose response may be moderate. It would be interesting to know if these food elicit a greater fat storage response say compared to food that produce a high glucose response but an intermediate insulin response. Or perhaps the dependent variable for fat storage is dietary fat content of food such as baked pastries, which elicit a high insulin and glucose response but also contain significant amounts of fat. As pointed out in the paper, further research is needed.

Something else that I found interesting was that low-carbers restrict carbs to stop insulin spikes but

some protein and fat-rich foods (eggs, beef, fish, lentils, cheese, cake, and doughnuts) induced as much insulin secretion as did some carbohydrate-rich foods (eg, beef was equal to brown rice and fish was equal to grain bread).

White vs Brown pasta is interesting, the starch is the same but the sugars are quite different (although only a small part of the carb grams) and makes a big difference to the gi numbers without affecting the insulin response. I'm trying to get my head around the numbers... I though blood glucose drove insulin but it's obviously not that simple. If avoiding insulin spikes is as simple as looking at the carbs/sugars numbers on the nutritional info, that makes it fairly easy to avoid foods which are likely to be stored as fat. Or is it dependant on the type of sugar, ie., it's only fructose that won't drive insulin?

What foods spike insulin the most? Well just look at the foods pro bodybuilders NEVER go without. Dairy, whey powder, eggs, fish, beef, chicken etc. Pro bodybuilders don't have insulin yet 99% of them use insulin to help build mass. If you want to be big you MUST have high insulin levels or you will look like one of those skinny fruitarian crew living on fructose with such low levels of insulin they look like a Tour De France rider despite not even being able to ride up a long climb.

Actually, if you bothered to read the paper, Apples, Oranges, Bananas and Grapes produced insulin scores of 59, 60, 81 and 82 respectively. Whereas Cheese, Eggs and Beef produced insulin scores of 45, 31 and 51 respectively, much lower than fruit. So, if the bodybuilders really wanted a hit of insulin, they would eat fruit.

durianrider wrote:What foods spike insulin the most? Well just look at the foods pro bodybuilders NEVER go without. Dairy, whey powder, eggs, fish, beef, chicken etc. Pro bodybuilders don't have insulin yet 99% of them use insulin to help build mass. If you want to be big you MUST have high insulin levels or you will look like one of those skinny fruitarian crew living on fructose with such low levels of insulin they look like a Tour De France rider despite not even being able to ride up a long climb.

Actually, if you bothered to read the paper, Apples, Oranges, Bananas and Grapes produced insulin scores of 59, 60, 81 and 82 respectively. Whereas Cheese, Eggs and Beef produced insulin scores of 45, 31 and 51 respectively, much lower than fruit. So, if the bodybuilders really wanted a hit of insulin, they would eat fruit.

CC, why bother with that level of detail or understanding. Besides, it's probably written by a secretly fat poser whose only qualification to talk on the subject is a relavant science degree or two, a PhD, years of research and lab experience.

Far better to go the only honest and well sourced info on the planet - Durian's videos. Well crafted, attention to detail, sources quoted, established hard facts that are broadly accepted in the scientific and research community and supported by large sets of randomised data.

I saw a good standup comedy last night at the Perth Fringe and it cost me something like $50 for me and the same for my wife. Along with the planet, Durian's video could have saved me big bucks if I had stayed home instead. Another plus.

durianrider wrote:What foods spike insulin the most? Well just look at the foods pro bodybuilders NEVER go without. Dairy, whey powder, eggs, fish, beef, chicken etc. Pro bodybuilders don't have insulin yet 99% of them use insulin to help build mass. If you want to be big you MUST have high insulin levels or you will look like one of those skinny fruitarian crew living on fructose with such low levels of insulin they look like a Tour De France rider despite not even being able to ride up a long climb.

Actually, if you bothered to read the paper, Apples, Oranges, Bananas and Grapes produced insulin scores of 59, 60, 81 and 82 respectively. Whereas Cheese, Eggs and Beef produced insulin scores of 45, 31 and 51 respectively, much lower than fruit. So, if the bodybuilders really wanted a hit of insulin, they would eat fruit.

CC, why bother with that level of detail or understanding. Besides, it's probably written by a secretly fat poser whose only qualification to talk on the subject is a relavant science degree or two, a PhD, years of research and lab experience.

Far better to go the only honest and well sourced info on the planet - Durian's videos. Well crafted, attention to detail, sources quoted, established hard facts that are broadly accepted in the scientific and research community and supported by large sets of randomised data.

I saw a good standup comedy last night at the Perth Fringe and it cost me something like $50 for me and the same for my wife. Along with the planet, Durian's video could have saved me big bucks if I had stayed home instead. Another plus.

The reason is that I hang out with a lot of carbophobics who believe that a) carbs make you fat, b) carbs (and only carbs) cause insulin spikes and c) cutting carbs is the only way to lose weight. They push a diet high in cheese, eggs, butter, beef and other meats believing that these foods do not spike insulin levels. Well, clearly from the research they do although to a lesser extent than fruit (for example). Considering beef vs apple (IS 51 vs IS 59) is virtually the same, I would say their fear of fruit is unwarranted. Now, when you consider serving size (in the study it was 435g of apple vs 158g of beef) you could say that apples are less insulinogenic than beef relative to serving size (not calories). If insulin score is why they were selecting their foods, apples would make more sense than beef. Of course I realise that there are other reasons for selecting foods besides insulin score.

some protein and fat-rich foods (eggs, beef, fish, lentils, cheese, cake, and doughnuts) induced as much insulin secretion as did some carbohydrate-rich foods (eg, beef was equal to brown rice and fish was equal to grain bread).

twizzle wrote:Blood sugar regulation. I'm confused as to why there isn't a direct correlation between blood glucose and insulin levels.

The human body is a lot more complicated than a linear relationship.

Yes, which makes it difficult to give a simple message. As I stated elsewhere, if I'd realised before how much I was being affected by what I was eating rather than the calories, I would have changed things a long time ago. But understanding what the underlying drivers are would be nice. ie. wholemeal pasta looks like a good "base" source of carbs for the average joe, but why doesn't it spike insulin?

sogood wrote:The human body is a lot more complicated than a linear relationship.

Yes, which makes it difficult to give a simple message...

Well, not always so. It's a question of what the subject matter is and what and how the matter is being summarised.

With the complexity and numerous highly focused studies out there, it's easy for people who don't have a good overview of the subject to get misled by limited knowledge and develop their pseudo-science theories and practices. It's also great for people in the know to spin their preferred angle for fame and/or financial gains. Question is, who can see through the smoke and attain a state of KISS?

twizzle wrote: But understanding what the underlying drivers are would be nice. ie. wholemeal pasta looks like a good "base" source of carbs for the average joe, but why doesn't it spike insulin?

Now you're getting into glycemic index (GI). Low GI carbs such as wholemeal products cause blood glucose levels to rise more slowly, therefore you don't see the same insulin release. The problems began when manufacturers started marketing "low GI" as being the same as "healthy", which isn't always the case. But low GI carbs have been shown to help insulin sensitivity and satiety (the feeling of fullness) after eating.

twizzle wrote: But understanding what the underlying drivers are would be nice. ie. wholemeal pasta looks like a good "base" source of carbs for the average joe, but why doesn't it spike insulin?

Now you're getting into glycemic index (GI). Low GI carbs such as wholemeal products cause blood glucose levels to rise more slowly, therefore you don't see the same insulin release. The problems began when manufacturers started marketing "low GI" as being the same as "healthy", which isn't always the case. But low GI carbs have been shown to help insulin sensitivity and satiety (the feeling of fullness) after eating.

No - we are looking at the Insulin index in conjunction with the glycemic load index. Have a look at the links above.

twizzle wrote:No - we are looking at the Insulin index in conjunction with the glycemic load index. Have a look at the links above.

Ah, sorry. I just saw your link to glucose regulation and hadn't read the other article. But I guess it just goes to show how complex the whole regulation of blood glucose actually is. And of course foods like proteins that don't cause a blood glucose spike can still induce the release of insulin. The satiety factor is really important too if people are to resist snacking between meals.

White vs Brown pasta is interesting, the starch is the same but the sugars are quite different (although only a small part of the carb grams) and makes a big difference to the gi numbers without affecting the insulin response. I'm trying to get my head around the numbers... I though blood glucose drove insulin but it's obviously not that simple. If avoiding insulin spikes is as simple as looking at the carbs/sugars numbers on the nutritional info, that makes it fairly easy to avoid foods which are likely to be stored as fat. Or is it dependant on the type of sugar, ie., it's only fructose that won't drive insulin?

What foods spike insulin the most? Well just look at the foods pro bodybuilders NEVER go without. Dairy, whey powder, eggs, fish, beef, chicken etc. Pro bodybuilders don't have insulin yet 99% of them use insulin to help build mass. If you want to be big you MUST have high insulin levels or you will look like one of those skinny fruitarian crew living on fructose with such low levels of insulin they look like a Tour De France rider despite not even being able to ride up a long climb.

Actually, if you bothered to read the paper, Apples, Oranges, Bananas and Grapes produced insulin scores of 59, 60, 81 and 82 respectively. Whereas Cheese, Eggs and Beef produced insulin scores of 45, 31 and 51 respectively, much lower than fruit. So, if the bodybuilders really wanted a hit of insulin, they would eat fruit.

Here is the real insulin index scores.

If you want to 'beef up' do you eat bananas or beef? If you are looking to lose weight does 'beef'n up' sound like a good think or a bad thing? Do 140kg men say 'Im a real fruit man! I love my fruit! Couldnt go without my fruit! God I love a good piece of fruit mate! GET SOME FRUIT INTO YA MATE BEFORE YOU WASTE AWAY! YOU LOOK LIKE YOU NEED SOME FRUIT MATE!

Not sure Ive ever heard any 140kg aussie male say that. Have heard the sayings if you switch the fruit with steak, beef, meat..

'GET A GOOD STEAK INTO YA LAD BEFORE YOU WASTE AWAY ON THAT SILLY RICE MUNCHING VEGAN DIET OF YOURS!' - Durianriders 420lb neighbour on the Sunshine Coast.

twizzle wrote:No - we are looking at the Insulin index in conjunction with the glycemic load index. Have a look at the links above.

Ah, sorry. I just saw your link to glucose regulation and hadn't read the other article. But I guess it just goes to show how complex the whole regulation of blood glucose actually is. And of course foods like proteins that don't cause a blood glucose spike can still induce the release of insulin. The satiety factor is really important too if people are to resist snacking between meals.

I snack between meals. Its not how much you eat, its what you eat. Do people honestly believe we have obese Australians that are binging out on bowls of organic steamed rice, fruit blended with water and oatmeal served with rice milk and cinamon sugar? What about baked potatoes with low fat hummos? Low fat buckwheat pancakes drowned in organic maple syrup?

Where are these obese Aussies that eat like this. Tell me and I would love to meet them personally. Just as I would love to meet a Koala that could clean my chain whilst I had a nap under the gum tree. Im sure both exist. Please help me find either.

durianrider wrote:I snack between meals. Its not how much you eat, its what you eat. Do people honestly believe we have obese Australians that are binging out on bowls of organic steamed rice, fruit blended with water and oatmeal served with rice milk and cinamon sugar? What about baked potatoes with low fat hummos? Low fat buckwheat pancakes drowned in organic maple syrup?

No and like people have said before the reason people are obese is because they eat crap that is full of high fructose corn sugar and saturated fats. Nobody is saying that organic steamed rice makes you obese. You leave this thread a few days and then bring it back full circle, can we move on from this vegan vs meat eaters debate?

Durian's table is a measure of the ratio of insulin secretion per gram of carbohydrate. Meats score high on this because they stimulate high insulin secretion for their small [] of carbohydrate.

Am J Clin Nutr November 1997 vol. 66 no. 5 1264-1276

"Insulin AUC values were divided by glucose AUC values to determine which foods were markedly insulinogenic relative to their glycemic effect (Table 4 and Figure 4). On average, the protein-rich foods stimulated a large amount of insulin secretion relative to their glycemic response, followed by the bakery products, snack foods, fruit,carbohydrate-rich foods, and breakfast cereals."

winstonw wrote:Durian's table is a measure of the ratio of insulin secretion per gram of carbohydrate. Meats score high on this because they stimulate high insulin secretion for their small [] of carbohydrate.

Am J Clin Nutr November 1997 vol. 66 no. 5 1264-1276

"Insulin AUC values were divided by glucose AUC values to determine which foods were markedly insulinogenic relative to their glycemic effect (Table 4 and Figure 4). On average, the protein-rich foods stimulated a large amount of insulin secretion relative to their glycemic response, followed by the bakery products, snack foods, fruit,carbohydrate-rich foods, and breakfast cereals."

Interesting article but quite selective posting. If you look at the actual insulin scores of 1000Kj of each food you can see that beef is actually lower than bananas and lentils.

twizzle wrote:Blood sugar regulation. I'm confused as to why there isn't a direct correlation between blood glucose and insulin levels.

The human body is a lot more complicated than a linear relationship.

Yes, which makes it difficult to give a simple message. As I stated elsewhere, if I'd realised before how much I was being affected by what I was eating rather than the calories, I would have changed things a long time ago. But understanding what the underlying drivers are would be nice. ie. wholemeal pasta looks like a good "base" source of carbs for the average joe, but why doesn't it spike insulin?

I agree that it's confusing. There is definitely something missing. Is it the levels of free fatty acids in the bloodstream in response to these foods? or is it the Leptin or Ghrelin response, a combination or something else? Who knows? The research has not yet been done (as far as I am aware).

When it comes to trouble brewing in our blood vessels we’re familiar with the image of fatty plaque sticking to artery walls and raising the risk of heart attack. We’re not so savvy about that other threat that can hide inside blood vessels: rising levels of blood sugar.

Around 16 per cent of Australians now have levels of blood sugar that are too high. That’s not high enough to mean full blown type 2 diabetes but enough to put you in pre-diabetes land where too much blood sugar – or glucose as doctors tend to call it – can begin harming arteries.

“It acts like rust in the blood vessels,” explains Professor Neale Cohen, General Manager of Diabetes Services at the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute. “But compared with our awareness of keeping cholesterol levels healthy or even getting checks for breast cancer, there’s less understanding of the need for healthy levels of blood glucose.”

But just how much is the sugar in our diet to blame for too much sugar in the blood?

Advertisement It’s a player, but not the only one says Cohen, who nominates obesity and sedentary living as the two main drivers, although genes also play a part. Being overweight can make it harder for the hormone insulin to control blood glucose levels, while too much sitting around gives our muscles so little to do that they don’t soak up enough of the glucose in our bloodstream that’s meant to be used for fuel.

As for what we eat, too much sugar adds to the kilojoule load that can make our waistlines bigger. But does fructose, the sugar found naturally in fruit and which makes up 50 per cent of cane sugar, (the other 50 per cent is glucose) promote diabetes and pre-diabetes in other ways?

“It may turn out to be more toxic than glucose, but whether fructose in processed foods is a major problem with diabetes isn’t clear cut – at the moment the evidence is inconsistent,” Cohen says.

With fresh fruit, its sugar content comes packaged with fibre and important nutrients so it’s good to eat in moderation, he adds – although as with too much of anything, too many pieces of fruit can add to the kilojoule load.

It makes sense to prefer slow burning low GI carbohydrate foods like legumes and whole grains over refined carbohydrates that, in excess, can contribute to raised blood glucose, says Cohen. But singling out sugar in the diet as the main cause of diabetes and pre-diabetes isn’t helpful if it distracts us from what he sees as a bigger culprit – the fact that we’re more inactive now than at any other time in human history.

Yet the noise over the role of sugar seems so much louder than the noise over inactivity. Last year after actor Alec Baldwin revealed that a diagnosis of pre-diabetes had motivated him to lose 13 kilos, the headline grabber was the fact that he’d given up sugar. Less widely reported was his other change of habit – more exercise.

Yes, it’s smart to go easy on sugar and it’s a no brainer that we should ditch diets based on foods overloaded with sugar, salt and bad fat. But implying that an overload of sugary food alone is why the body struggles to keep blood glucose under control is misleading.

There’s one good thing about pre-diabetes though: it’s a warning. There’s still time to make lifestyle changes that can help bring blood sugar back to normal before you’re stuck with diabetes. But blood glucose rises silently and the only way to know you’re drifting into the danger zone is a blood test, says Cohen who suggests that people over 40 use the AusDrisk Test, a free online tool that calculates your risk of Type 2 diabetes. Women with a history of gestational diabetes or polycystic ovary syndrome should also have regular blood testing for diabetes, he adds.